 | ||
| Dr. David Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 58 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
| ||
| Dr. David Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 58 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
8 December 2000
"For years I could not understand why good godly men like Daniel and Jeremiah repented of national sins of which they personally were not guilty. But when I look at the United States at the end of the 20th century, I begin to see it differently.
Just what does God see when He looks at the US? I believe he sees a land where sodomites reign and the blood of innocents flows in the streets like a river; where evil is called good, and good is called evil; where mischief is "framed by law". He sees a country where the bodies of murdered infants are sold for "research" ($600 for an intact cadaver!) while the passing of flies, owls and manatees is mourned as a national tragedy; where Christian students are forbidden to pray, carry a Bible, or tell classmates about Jesus, while Muslim students are excused from class and provided with facilities to chant incantations during the observance of Ramadan; where it is a "hate crime" to call a pervert a sodomite, but Bible believers can be called idiots on national TV with impunity.
And in the midst of the degradation and carnage, stand groups of conservative Christians saying, "I didn't do it!"
When faced with such a scene, how can we do anything but hang our heads in shame and cry, "Oh, God, forgive us!"
signed NC in SC
TCN - Amen. Conservatives have a bigger battle than just keeping Gore out of the White House. We need to try to hold off judgment until we can turn the tide back to our Christian heritage. If we don't accomplish the task soon God is going to have to judge us or apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah for partiality.
A case of religious liberty
Brad Igou, a historian who studied the community and publishes the "Amish Country News" in Lancaster, Pa., recounts on his Web site the little-known story of how the Amish won a landmark exemption from payroll taxes. Soon after the government established the Social Security program, Amish farmers refused to pay into the so-called insurance scheme. For the Amish, Igou explains, "the care of the elderly is seen as the responsibility of the family and community, not the government. Whether it be additions built onto the main house where grandparents retire, benefit sales to pay large medical bills, or the community effort of a barn-raising, the Amish truly try to take care of their own."
When Amish farmers in Ohio refused to pay the taxes voluntarily in 1956, the Internal Revenue System placed liens on bank accounts they maintained to cover the tax. This passive payment plan, however, was still in violation of many farmers' core religious values. "But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith," said the Amish elders, citing a Biblical passage from the book of Timothy.
When farmer Valentine Byler refused to pay $308.96 in back taxes, federal bureaucrats took him to court. Igou writes that a U.S. district judge angrily dismissed the case and chastised the IRS for having nothing "better to do than to take a peaceful man off his farm and drag him into court." In retaliation, the IRS raided Byler's fields and seized three of his horses.
This police-state action caused a national uproar. The New York Herald Tribune editorialized: "What kind of 'welfare' is it that takes a farmer's horses away at spring plowing time in order to dragoon a whole community into a 'benefit' scheme it neither needs nor wants, and which offends its deeply held religious scruples?" Byler's case led to an amendment to the 1965 Medicare bill exempting the Old Order Amish -- and any other religious objectors who opposed government insurance schemes -- from paying self-employment taxes for government old-age benefits.
Now, if only Congress would allow the rest of us self-employed folks who subscribe to the doctrine of self-reliance to opt out of the system.
Thirty-five years later, the Amish are still struggling to preserve their values and protect their freedom. The U.S. Department of Labor recently launched a crackdown on Amish craftsmen who employ their children in the family trades. Responding to complaints from non-Amish competitors, the Labor Department conducted enforcement sweeps in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana. One Amish man who owns a leather shop was reportedly fined $8,000 simply because his 13-year-old daughter worked a store cash register.
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), who met with the Amish community last week, points out that existing child labor law "even prevents Amish parents from allowing their teen-age children to sweep sawdust or stack wood on premises where woodworking tools are used." Pitts has guided legislation to change the overzealous rules twice through the House, but the Senate refuses to pass a version of the bill out of committee.
Regulators say that children must be protected from "safety hazards." But the real danger to the Amish -- and to all Americans -- is continued encroachment by Big Government on the fundamental freedom to practice their faith, make a living, and raise their families in peace.
[ From "The Amish vs. the Feds" by Michelle Malkin ]
Does a district court judge have the authority to order a home school parent to send a child back to the public school without a hearing?
A mother from Logan County, Kentucky, will have an opportunity on Monday to tell a Circuit Court Judge in Russellville why she failed to comply with a lower court order to stop educating her daughter at home and to return the daughter to public school.
On Dec. 6, lawyers from the Home School Legal Defense Association, in Purcellville, Virginia, persuaded Circuit Court Judge Tyler Gill in Russellville to freeze, or "stay" a warrant for the mother's arrest until a hearing could be held. The mother, Mrs. D, will then have an opportunity to respond to the charge that she is in contempt of the lower court for failing to return her child to the public school.
Mrs. D filed the legally required notice of intent to home school with Logan County High School. But school officials decided to pursue truancy charges for the school days between the time the daughter was withdrawn from school and the time the school says it received the notice of intent from Mrs. D.
At the arraignment on the truancy charge, Logan County District Court Judge Sue Carol Browning ordered the daughter to return to the public high school. But because of her daughter's persistent headaches, Mrs. D failed to obey the court order. When Judge Browning learned that the mother had not enrolled the child in public school as ordered, she considered Mrs. D to be in contempt of the order and issued a warrant for her arrest.
The warrant has been suspended until Monday, Dec. 11, when Judge Tyler Gill of the 7th Judicial Circuit will hold a hearing on Mrs. D's situation.
Judge Gill will decide then whether the warrant was justified, and whether the juvenile judge had the authority to order the child to public school. Depending on the outcome, Mrs. D may still face jail time.
Please pray for peace and strength for Mrs. D and her daughter. Ask God to give His wisdom to Judge Gill, and to soften Judge Browning's heart toward home schoolers. Pray that God will be glorified in this.
"The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will." Proverbs 21:1
[ HSLDA, Rich Jefferson RichJ@hslda.org ]
Public comments sought on new rules for non-profits
The Internal Revenue Service is considering the issuance of new guidelines on Internet communications by tax-exempt organizations.
The tax collection agency quietly released a document called "Announcement 2000-84" soliciting public comment on possible new regulations for charities, think tanks and educational organizations.
Among the questions the IRS is addressing in its study of exempt organizations and the Internet:
"Does providing a hyperlink on a charitable organization's website to another organization that engages in political campaign intervention result in per se prohibited political intervention?"
"To what extent are statements made by subscribers to a forum, such as a listserv or newsgroup, attributable to an exempt organization that maintains the forum?"
"Does a website constitute a single publication or communication? If not, how should it be separated into distinct publications or communications?"
House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, has issued a statement condemning the IRS' consideration of new regulations for the Internet.
"The IRS has no business getting involved in whether a think thank has links on its website, or how often a charity's site is updated," he said. "The idea of turning the tax man into a Net cop would have a chilling effect on free speech on the Internet. I'm glad the agency has not taken any regulatory action yet. But let's be clear about this. We will be watching what they do, and we will not tolerate any backdoor attempt to regulate the Internet."
The public comment period on this issue will close Feb. 13, 2001, according to the IRS announcement. Comments are to be directed to Judith E. Kindell, the principal author of the announcement, at the IRS, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20224.
Her email address is TE/GE-Exempt-2@irs.gov
Kindell did not return calls from WorldNetDaily.
** Ship personnel say incident more serious threat than Pentagon admits
A pair of Russian warplanes that made at least three high-speed passes over a U.S. aircraft carrier stationed in the Sea of Japan in October constituted a much more serious threat than the Pentagon has admitted and were easily in a position to destroy the ship if the planes had had hostile intentions, say Navy personnel.
According to reports, a Russian air force Su-24 "Fencer" accompanied by an Su-27 "Flanker" made unopposed passes over the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) on Oct. 9, as the carrier was being refueled.
Russian fighters and reconnaissance planes made a second attempt to get close to the carrier on Nov. 9 -- a repeat performance for which the Pentagon, as well as eyewitnesses aboard ship, said the carrier was prepared. But it was the first incident in October that caused alarm.
Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon said during a regularly scheduled press briefing Nov. 30 that the Russian fighters were detected on radar well in advance of their high-speed passes. Naval officers aboard ship who spoke of the incident on the condition of anonymity agreed.
However, at the time the carrier's combat information center alerted the ship's commander, Capt. Allen G. Myers, that the Russian fighters were inbound, none of the carrier's fighters were airborne. The ship carries 85 aircraft, according to Navy figures, and has a crew of over 5,500.
Witnesses said Myers immediately ordered the launch of alert fighters, but the ship's scheduled fighter squadron was on "Alert-30" status -- a minimum launch time of 30 minutes where pilots are "in the ready room" but are not sitting in cockpits waiting to be launched.
Bacon told reporters only that there "may have been a slight delay" in getting the interceptors in the air, explaining that because the Kitty Hawk was taking on fuel, it was not sailing fast enough to launch its aircraft. One naval officer onboard the ship said, "40 minutes after the CO [commanding officer] called away the alerts," the Russian planes "made a 500-knot, 200-foot pass directly over the tower" of the carrier.
Before the Kitty Hawk could get a single plane airborne, the Russian fighters made two more passes. Worse, witnesses said, the first plane off the deck was an EA-6B Prowler -- a plane used primarily for electronic jamming of an enemy's radar and air defenses, not a fighter capable of intercepting another warplane.
The EA-6B "ended up in a one-versus-one with a Flanker just in front of the ship." One witness said the Flanker was all over him. "He was screaming for help when finally a [F/A-18] Hornet from our sister squadron got off the deck and made the intercept. It was too late."
Naval personnel noted that "the entire crew watched overhead as the Russians made a mockery of our feeble attempt of intercepting them."
The Clinton administration downplayed the incident.
"In neither case did the [Navy] feel that any protest was warranted, and, therefore, no protest was made to the Russians," Bacon said last month.
Moscow, however, considers the incident much more serious, if not a "victory" of sorts, considering Russian aircrews have not overflown a U.S. carrier in three decades.
The mission, which according to Russian military officials who spoke with the BBC was billed as a "top-secret intelligence operation," was specifically designed to test U.S. carrier group defenses.
[ From an article by Jon E. Dougherty - WorldNetDaily.com ]
Judicial Watch Seeking Immediate Court Hearing to Undo Obstruction Efforts
(Washington, D.C./Miami, Florida) Judicial Watch, Inc., the nonpartisan, public-interest law firm that fights government abuse, has been conducting ballot inspections in Florida's 67 counties. Last week, Judicial Watch uncovered ballot irregularities in Palm Beach County, and later brought this to the attention of Judge N. Sanders Sauls in his court proceeding in Leon County. Indeed, Judge Sauls had granted Judicial Watch special observer status and Larry Klayman, Chairman of Judicial Watch, was present in the courtroom during last week's trial on behalf of the public interest. The renowned columnist Robert S. Novak wrote a column about Judicial Watch's efforts. See "The Campaign Beyond Jan. 20," The Washington Post, December 4, 2000, at www.JudicialWatch.org.
Today, after much legal wrangling with Broward County, where it was necessary for Judicial Watch to file a complaint, Judicial Watch had been scheduled to conduct a ballot inspection in Ft. Lauderdale this morning. However, at the twelfth hour, the Republicans sought to intervene, and in an ex parte hearing which was not attended by Judicial Watch, convinced the Court to prevent Judicial Watch's ballot inspection for the time being. Judicial Watch believes that the judge, who previously told Judicial Watch she would not entertain any emergency motions on this matter, was provided with inaccurate or incomplete information about Judicial Watch's inspection of the Broward ballots by the Republicans. Judicial Watch is now seeking an emergency hearing this afternoon with the Court to reinstate the inspection for today.
"Judicial Watch is nonpartisan, and on behalf of the American people will not be pushed around by any political party. The Republicans are creating a terrible appearance that they have something to hide in Broward County," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.
"Judicial Watch will not rest until all the facts are known to the American people," added Judicial Watch President Thomas Fitton.
Earlier this week Harry Jacobs, the plaintiff in Florida's Seminole County absentee ballot case, admitted under oath that he'd consulted with lawyers for Vice President Al Gore.
Understandably, Jacobs was reluctant to make the confession, since Gore continues to publicly insist he has nothing to do with the lawsuit that seeks to have state Judge Nikki Clark toss out 15,000 completely legal votes in order to tip the election the veep's way.
No one was more surprised by Jacobs' confession than Chris Matthews, host of CNBC's "Hardball," who replayed video of the Democratic activist when he appeared on his show last Wednesday and denied any such contacts:
MATTHEWS: Have you had any contact with Ron Klain or any of the attorneys for the Gore campaign?
JACOBS: No, sir.
MATTHEWS: None at all? No contact with the Gore people at all in Washington or in Florida?
JACOBS: Well, I can tell you that I've talked to a lot of Democrats. I've also spoken to a lot of Republicans. Whether or not they have some official capacity, that's something unknown to me. I'm pursuing this case on my own.
MATTHEWS: You got no signal urging you on, for example; no cheering section from anybody connected to Gore?
JACOBS: Not that I'm aware of.
When placed under oath three days later, Jacobs acknowledged talking to Gore campaign attorneys Mitchell Berger and Mark Herron.
[ NewsMax ]
If you were as confused as we were Tuesday when Vice President Al Gore charged that Democrat absentee ballot applications were "thrown out" by Republican election officials in Seminole County, Fla., don't worry. You didn't miss what would undoubtedly be a bombshell development, one as yet unreported anywhere else. It turns out that no absentee ballot applications - Democrat or Republican - were thrown out in Seminole.
Gore simply made the allegation up out of whole cloth.
"More than enough votes were potentially taken away from Democrats because they were not given the same access as Republicans," Gore told reporters outside the White House.
"Remember, according to what's come out in that case ... Democrats were denied an opportunity to come in, denied a chance to even look at the applications, and those applications were thrown out."
"Now, that doesn't seem fair to me," Gore complained.
Only the New York Daily News noted Gore's whopper, first citing the above quote, then explaining to its readers:
"The vice president misstated the central issue in the case. ... The suit does not make that allegation (that Democrat applications were thrown out). The Democratic Party did not need to alter ballot applications because the forms it had mailed to voters included all the needed information."
The New York Times and the New York Post simply reported Gore's comment without noting its inaccuracy.
Last Thursday the Wall Street Journal explained why Republicans alone were given access to absentee ballot applications in Seminole County, revealing a key detail omitted from almost all coverage of the case before or since:
"The controversy centers on Florida's requirement that applications for absentee ballots contain voter identification numbers. Both parties sent out many applications with these numbers already filled in by computer. But software error caused the omission of numbers from some sent out by the Republicans. ... There was no similar problem on applications mailed out by the Democrats."
[ NewsMax ]
Can you imagine working at the following Company?
It has a little over 500 employees with the following statistics:
29 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have bankrupted at least two businesses
3 have been arrested for assault
71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 are current defendants in lawsuits
In 1998 alone, 84 were stopped for drunk driving.
Can you guess which organization this is? Give up?
It's the 535 members of the United States Congress. The same group that perpetually cranks out hundreds upon hundreds of new laws designed to keep the rest of us in line.
The homepage and archives for The Conservative Newsletter are located on the WWW at http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn/
This newsletter is sent by subscription only. If you do not wish to be on the mailing list, please let us know and you will be removed immediately. To be removed from this mailing list, simply reply to this newsletter with the word REMOVE in the body of your reply. You may also send your request to theconservative@usa.net .
Thank you.
